Irregular changes of perspective in history?

So, hello everyone
I'm currently writing a story that has a main character and is primarily told from that person's perspective. Therefore, the story is essentially told by a personal narrator.

However, there are certain sections where I think it might be interesting to tell this scene from a different perspective. From reading it myself, however, I've only ever seen the story either focus 100% on one person or have regular changes of perspective.

So I wanted to ask: Do such irregular perspective changes even make sense, and how would one ideally handle them? Or is the whole thing too confusing and should we avoid them?

Thank you very much in advance!

3 votes, average: 3.00 out of 1 (3 rating, 3 votes, rated)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
xJustMex
9 months ago

There are no inconvenient rules for changing perspective. If you think it's best for history to change the perspective, do that. Whether this happens regularly or irregularly does not matter too much.

Personally, I like change of perspective only if it actually makes sense, because the reader has to know something that cannot be told/shown with the actual perspective (eg if the protagonist is not at all or if one wants to illuminate the feelings of another character).

In any case, change of perspective should not be used arbitrarily. Besides, I don't see any problems. The tastes of this are going far apart anyway.

Love

tinalisatina
9 months ago

Well, what do you mean regularly? He should take place where he makes sense.

tinalisatina
9 months ago
Reply to  Tjakuma

As I said, there is no rule. And if it makes sense, you can put it in between. Among the individual protagonists or to the narrator. It must only be recognizable and comprehensible for the reader.